Too many dids...

[Raven Morpheus]

Hello, me again...

Just come back again to SH4 after giving it a rest for a while (since November last year) and I'm having troubles again...

I've got the Real Environments mod (v5.0) and Game Fixes Only mod installed.


I'm not having problems hitting ships with torpedoes (well, when they're going nicely in a convoy line astern at least, when the convoy breaks up and starts circling, usually after the 1st ship is hit, is another barrel of fish) but I am getting a lot of duds.

For example I just did the sub school mission (to check my targeting) where you have to sink the (Mogami?) warship and all though I had 100% fish on target 50% of them were duds!! I watched using the free camera and the one's that are duds just bounced off the hull!!

I've tried firing at what I consider short range (800yds) on slow speed with contact detonators, I've tried magnetic detonators, and I've tried longer ranges with high speed - I've basically tried all combinations of speed/detonators. Nothing seems to work.

This was also happening yesterday in my campaign when I had a nice juicy big fat large convoy of about a half dozen merchant ships or more going at 9knots!


I've read that it's common for this to be the case as it was thus in real life, but is there a way to reduce the problem - I simply cannot believe US sub captains knew there was such a problem and just had to live with it (i.e. they didn't find some tactic/workaround whatever to deal with it)?!

[Dread Knot]

I've read that it's common for this to be the case as it was thus in real life, but is there a way to reduce the problem - I simply cannot believe US sub captains knew there was such a problem and just had to live with it (i.e. they didn't find some tactic/workaround whatever to deal with it)?!

It was quite a scandal. The straw that finally broke the camels back was the notorious incident in 1943, when a U.S. submarine commander crippled a large freighter with a spread of two torpedoes, then carefully squared off his boat and fired no less that thirteen additional torpedoes at a theoretically perfect angle of impact at the theoretically perfect range. Not one detonated. After taking his last remaining torpedo home for examination the problem was finally sorted, but even that came after having to prove to the Ordinance Bureau that the torpedoes ran deeper than set, and the magnetic exploder didn't work. Two and a half years into the Pacific War.

Historically, a quick fix after the torpedo defects were finally acknowledged, was to encourage "glancing" shots (which cut the number of duds in half),until a permanent solution could be found. A direct hit on the target at a 90 degree angle, as recommended in training, would result in a failure to detonate. The exploder only functioned when the torpedo impacted the target at an oblique angle.

[ETR3(SS)]

And to add to that, the reason the detonators didn't work is that they were being crushed by the straight on impact.

[neilbyrne]

The most astonishing incident I've read about the failures coincident with US torpedo fuzing in WWII concerns Albert Einstein. He was, as I remember, touring the torpedo works on Goat Island, RI prior to the war. He was very proudly handed a Mk 6 fuze to examine. After looking, he quickly said that it would never work to the shock of all assembled. But wait. Thereafter, he returned to New York and drew a diagram denoting the required fixes and sent it to the navy. All ignored.

[Dread Knot]

The most astonishing incident I've read about the failures coincident with US torpedo fuzing in WWII concerns Albert Einstein. He was, as I remember, touring the torpedo works on Goat Island, RI prior to the war. He was very proudly handed a Mk 6 fuze to examine. After looking, he quickly said that it would never work to the shock of all assembled. But wait. Thereafter, he returned to New York and drew a diagram denoting the required fixes and sent it to the navy. All ignored.

That's interesting. I had never heard of a connection between Albert Einstein and torpedo/Navy work.

I've heard the frugal Depression era economics get a lot of the blame. A torpedo was considered to be an expensive item to the fleet budget for practice purposes. Therefore torpedoes were not tested to destruction. They were fired against soft targets with floatable warheads so they could be salvaged for reuse. Seems crazy in retrospect that the warheads were almost never tested.

[neilbyrne]

The Einstein incident is related on pg 119 of Russell Crenshaw's book, The Battle of Tassafaronga, Naval Institute Press.

[TorpX]

I did read something about Einstein suggesting a way to fix the Mk. 6 exploder in another source, but there wasn't that much detail.




As far as too many duds is concerned, the game is still more generous than real-life circumstances.


most of the time crews didn't know why they missed - just that there were no explosions (no magic attack map)
for the most part there were no workarounds like adjusting angles, using Mk. 10's, such
they couldn't just turn the magnetic influence element on/off - they were under orders not to disable it
when the electric torps came into service they had a whole new set of bugs to deal with

[Raven Morpheus]

So how does all that translate to the game?

Am I going to have to put up with the duds, and perhaps reducing their number by trying off-90 degree shots, until I get a new boat or torpedoes (not that I know how that works - don't know how to choose armaments yet) in 1943?

[neilbyrne]

Am I going to have to put up with the duds, and perhaps reducing their number by trying off-90 degree shots, until I get a new boat or torpedoes (not that I know how that works - don't know how to choose armaments yet) in 1943?


I think it depends what mod you're playing. My experience with TMO so far yields a dud rate that seems to run around 20-33% per patrol, but sometimes lower. I have not played Traveller Mod, but the documentation says it's very high. It's been so long since I played vanilla SH4 that I don't remember what that rate is.

I don't think that aiming for glancing shots decreases the dud rate in game. At least I haven't seen that.

TMO's dud rate goes to zero in accord with the fixes the navy implemented in the summer of '43. Seems like all torpedoes loaded after June '43 fuze correctly.

You could always go into game options and just check the no duds box. The purists hereabouts disapprove, but hey it's your game.

[merc4ulfate]

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/torpedo/index.htm

It is my belief that if the core rod had been cut one half to one inch shorter the dud rate would have went down drastically.

Premature detonations was most likely the fault of moisture in the detonator mechanism.

I have noticed in the game with the mods I am running the dud rate does not significantly drop until mid to late 1943. Until then ... happy suffering.

http://www.historynet.com/us-torpedo-troubles-during-world-war-ii.htm


Generic Mod Enabler - v2.6.0.157
1_TriggerMaru_Overhaul_2-5
1_TMO_25_small_patch
RSRDC_TMO_V502
RSRDC_V5xx_Patch1
Traveller Mod v2.6 TMO
#1 Real Environment mod install
Traveller Mod 2.6 Patch 1 - ISE v3 Patch
#4 Warships retextured
Traveller Mod 2.6 No Midway Transfer
Traveller Mod 2.6 No DC Camera Shake
Traveller Mod 2.6 Larger Search Patterns
Traveller Mod 2.6 Harder Enemy AI Escorts
Traveller Mod 2.6 Automatic Ship ID
Traveller Alternate Main Loading Screens
Convoy Routes TMO+RSRD
tambor198's TMO+RSRDC missions pack

==========

==========

[HertogJan]

Just finished a patrol in my new career, only two torpedoes hit home, rest were all dud's :/\\!!

Unfortunately I have to keep my mouth shut due to the fact I made a mess of things on my last patrol :oops:

I swear, I'll switch all of them with MK10's if nothing's done about it!!
I rather spend 4 MK10's on a fishing trawler then 1 MK14 on a docked vessel :nope:
Going to need to bribe some people to get them tho :hmmm:

:wah: I want to see BOOHHHOOMs!!! :wah:

[Armistead]

Well, mods set the dud rate values, but they're other factors/values that do have effect. If weather is rough use contact, if calm use influence. Slower speeds and slight angles will help some with duds.

As stated, you can use the M10's or simply cut the dud torps off in options.. Things get better in 43.

I don't have the game loaded on my current pc, but you can adjust dud rates if you want.

[merc4ulfate]

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/713/v8zc.png


http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/546/lbzg.png

Admiral Lockwood stated at a wartime conference in Washington that, "If the Bureau of Ordnance can't provide us with torpedoes that will hit and explode… then for God's sake, get the Bureau of Ships to design a boat hook with which we can rip the plates off a target's side!"


Look at the diagrams above and try something. Let's see if the game can simulate a solution as well as it simulates a fault. It was taught that Plate XIX was best practise. Although from many reports Plate XXI was more successful especially if the angle was more obtuse.

After the 70% failure rate that Admiral Lockwood was shown he immediately directed his boats at sea to launch their torpedoes from large, obtuse angles. They were ordered to improvise, to use "ANYTHING BUT THE TEXTBOOK 90-DEGREE TRACT."

I began to notice through coincidence or programming that when I used large obtuse angles I not only got more detonations I also got twisted hunks of metal sinking to the bottom with as few as one torpedo and many of those splitting in two.

My hit ratio went up but like I said this could have been just programmings so it is something I am going to test at some point.

Moving the depth mechanism to the curved tail section and having been tested with an uncalibrated unit from BuOrds increased the depth of running. Being that they ran too deep it is no wonder the magnetic detonators did not work but since the firing pins and assembly had been designed with 1930's torpedo speeds they were being broken on impact unless large obtuse angles were used which was taught as worst practices.


@Armistead: Doesn't Mods like TMO override game play settings so if you set them the mod changes them back??

http://www.hnsa.org/doc/torpedo/index.htm


Generic Mod Enabler - v2.6.0.157
1_TriggerMaru_Overhaul_2-5
1_TMO_25_small_patch
RSRDC_TMO_V502
RSRDC_V5xx_Patch1
Traveller Mod v2.6 TMO
#1 Real Environment mod install
Traveller Mod 2.6 Patch 1 - ISE v3 Patch
#4 Warships retextured
Traveller Mod 2.6 No Midway Transfer
Traveller Mod 2.6 No DC Camera Shake
Traveller Mod 2.6 Larger Search Patterns
Traveller Mod 2.6 Harder Enemy AI Escorts
Traveller Mod 2.6 Automatic Ship ID
Traveller Alternate Main Loading Screens
Convoy Routes TMO+RSRD
tambor198's TMO+RSRDC missions pack

=============
=============

[TorpX]

I don't think that aiming for glancing shots decreases the dud rate in game. At least I haven't seen that.




I began to notice through coincidence or programming that when I used large obtuse angles I not only got more detonations I also got twisted hunks of metal sinking to the bottom with as few as one torpedo and many of those splitting in two.



I haven't verified it with tests, but in the torpedo files there is a structure in place for changing the dud % vs. angle. So, it should make a difference. Don't know why it would change the damage though. Of course, mods have different dud rates and all.

In RFB, one can expect about 80% duds in the early war period, if I'm not mistaken.



In the literature I've read, Captains were taught to use a track angle referred to as the "optimum track angle"

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m526/TorpX/Misc/OTA_zps8e2102a8.png


This provided for the greatest amount of error tolerance in the target's course. It usually was about 110 degrees or so (for the Mk. 14 torpedo). The 90 degree "textbook" angle was something that the Germans used; their contact exploders required impact at the nose of the torpedo, which limited their range of acceptable track angles.

[merc4ulfate]

TorpX, "In the literature I've read, Captains were taught to use a track angle referred to as the "optimum track angle""

While this is true because of the malfunctions of the torpedoes the optimum became the "never use". It was only a temporary fix until the string of errors had been tracked down and resolved but skippers were told not to use the textbook firing procedures when it came to optimum track angles.

In the diagrams I have listed what I labeled as "worst" was actually what they recommended but Admiral Lockwood changed that because of the better success with the large obtuse angles. Glancing hits caused less duds when using the contact detonators. This fault was due to the guide rails and firing pins being crushed upon impact at optimum angles.

[Raven Morpheus]

So basically until I get to late 1943 I should be trying for hits at greater than 90 degrees.

I had another few goes again at the sub school sink the warship mission, I do it frequently to check I'm doing things right, and I tried with low speed and magnetic detonators and I repeatedly hit with all 4 torpedoes I fired at once. I think only once did I get one explode prematurely.


Although I've not tried it with contact detonators and obviously the enemy ship has far more time to spot your torpedoes...


So in game terms I think perhaps at least one other solution could be to use low speed on the torpedoes, seems to have worked for me in that sub school mission at least, I'm going to try to put it into practice on my 3rd career mission and see how I get on.

[TorpX]

While this is true because of the malfunctions of the torpedoes the optimum became the "never use". It was only a temporary fix until the string of errors had been tracked down and resolved but skippers were told not to use the textbook firing procedures when it came to optimum track angles.

In the diagrams I have listed what I labeled as "worst" was actually what they recommended but Admiral Lockwood changed that because of the better success with the large obtuse angles. Glancing hits caused less duds when using the contact detonators. This fault was due to the guide rails and firing pins being crushed upon impact at optimum angles.

Yes, that is true, but Lockwood really didn't know this before he had the drop tests conducted, which was well into the war. Prior to that, all he could really be sure of, is that sometimes they functioned as intended, and sometimes they didn't. The nature of the problem was unknown.



The drop tests, where concrete filled warheads with Mk. 6 exploders were dropped on steel plates, were simple and easy to do. BuOrd could have done them before the outbreak of war, without destroying a single torpedo, but did not. It was a tragedy, really.
[I realize, you probably already know most of this.]

Another wrinkle that occurred to me, is that a torpedo warhead being dropped on a steel plate is not the same as one hitting a ship's hull. One dropped on a thick steel plate will be subjected to the full force of the impact (only reduced by the angle of the plate), whereas, one hitting a ships hull may dent or even burst through the hull plates, and suffer a less violent impact. This may account for the seemingly random results obtained by the Mk. 6. [I read one account of a German torpedo bursting through the side of a hull, skidding along the bottom, before smashing it's way out the other side; so this is not just speculation on my part.]



So basically until I get to late 1943 I should be trying for hits at greater than 90 degrees.

..................

I think, no matter what tactics you decide to use, you will have to reckon on using more torpedoes for every ship sunk. Adjusting speeds or gaming angles may give you more detonations, but will likely also get you more misses, as well. This is like a hitter in baseball that swings for the outfield every time. He gets a lot of home runs, but also strikes out a lot. There isn't rally a good substitute for a properly functioning torpedo (Lockwood's request for a giant book hook, aside.:03:).

[merc4ulfate]

There are several instances where torpedoes went through the hull of Japanese ships without exploding.

================

Because of this logistics fiasco, veteran submariner and historian Paul Schratz said he "was only one of many frustrated submariners who thought it a violation of New Mexico scenery to test the A-bomb at Alamagordo when the naval torpedo station was available."

:fff:

[TorpX]

Because of this logistics fiasco, veteran submariner and historian Paul Schratz said he "was only one of many frustrated submariners who thought it a violation of New Mexico scenery to test the A-bomb at Alamagordo when the naval torpedo station was available."

:fff:

:har:

Yes, there is no doubt the torpedo establishment let the Navy down, big time.